To this is absolutely insane! Universal Credit Sanction

Gender reassignment is a protected characteristic though, and this is what she was incorrectly referring to, instead of sex discrimination, which also isn't relevant to OP's DD's dismissal.

No, I've already explained to her that she meant sex discrimination, not gender discrimination - see my comment to her at 22:53hrs above. She also doesn't know the difference between unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal, which I've also explained to her - see my comment at 22:39hrs on the previous page.
It's clear she doesn't know anything about employment law.

Many in the workforce may miss one appointment which means they don’t get job -role, convenience, pay - if they miss an interview. If you apply that universally yes one has to live with the consequences.

Gender is not a protected characteristic. And has been explained to you, he made a comment about a third party’s weight which he’d probably have said to a man as much as a woman. Given your lack of understanding of the laws around these things I’d stop sounding so sure of what’s possible.

No, she isn’t. She thinks she’s saying “sex discrimination.” But she isn’t.

Someone who thinks sex and gender mean the same thing has absolutely no clue what she is talking about when it comes to employment tribunals. She absolutely doesn’t mean people with a GRC.

She has no rights
https://www.gov.uk/dismissal

@BeltaLodaLife @AnneLovesGilbert
She's referring to one of the nine protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010, gender reassignment, which has nothing to do with OP's DD's case.

So you’re another one who thinks it’s totally inoffensive to say that people with bowel issues have no choice but to have an accident on the job centre chair and can’t actually leave their house?

Another one who thinks it’s really awful to talk about medical aids which allow people with disabilities to leave the house.

And apparently another one who things that the poster going on about it was absolutely relevant on a thread about a woman with zero disabilities.

No, you didn’t read the rest of the comments.

oh! And also the fearmongering from that poster! Despite being told repeatedly that, as she has a disability, UC would arrange alternatives for her so she wouldn’t be put in that position if she really couldn’t. But she kept going. People with disabilities will be reading this, and it makes claiming UC even more scary as they’ll think there won’t be reasonable adjustments for them.

She was only there for 3 days but I have heard that employees will get employee rights from day 1. I don't know when. That's probably why the ops daughter is having difficulties getting another job.

You mean sex discrimination, not gender discrimination, and OP didn't suffer it. Furthermore, OP has already told us that only her DD and the MD were in the room when he made his vile comment.
There are many things in life which are morally unfair, but that doesn't mean they're legally unfair.

I did read it all.

Maybe read the rest before you get involved.

There is no such thing as gender discrimination.

She wasn't a good fit. Who is he to the business?
He may be the CEO of the company. The op said it was only the two of them. It's his word against hers.

Extremely callous.

How is there no such thing.

There are loads of gender discrimination / sexual harrassment / age discrimination / race discrimination cases taken against employers.

It is disgusting, but it's not actionable. Please tell me what action you think OP's DD could bring against her former employer and in which court?

What’s gender discrimination in British law?

No such thing as gender discrimination.

The DD didnt suffer breach of contract , but she did suffer gender discrimination.

If she has a witness to what the boss said, she could bring him to court.

Employers have been brought to court for less.

Yes, but not for unfair dismissal (which is what you just claimed about the woman in Ireland) because as I have posted, repeatedly, that requires at least two years' continuous service for a claim to be brought to ET.
A claim for wrongful dismissal (breach of contract) can be brought to ET or the county court and you don't need at least two years' continuous service for that because that's a day one right, but there has to be a breach of your employment contract to bring such a claim and there is no indication that OP's DD has suffered a breach of contract (her employer actually paid her contractual notice of one month).

Yes, it’s disgusting but they could fire her after just a few days for any reason. She will never ever prove that she was fired because she was a woman (which is the only shot she would get as a protected characteristics). She can’t afford to bring the claim, and she would lose. Even if she won, she wouldn’t get her job back. She would get paid for a reasonable about of time in which she was then expected to find more work so just a few months pay.

Of course they have done something wrong.

The boss was sexist and misogynistic. When the ops daughtet called him out on it, he fired her.

Its disgusting.

She could definitely bring him to court for it.
It depends on how much proof she has, whether i would bring it to court.

She would have to weigh up if there were any witnesses or not. Otherwise its his word against hers

But they’ve not done anything wrong. There is no action to take.

Right but it still shows that an action can be taken before two years employment